formation? If the gentleman from Delaware, or other gentlemen thought so, why not combat a decision at the time? Did they imagine that, without the expression of a murmur by them, the mover would himself rise and oppose his own motion? [H. OF R. public burdens could be reduced, he would be delighted with the act of reduction. Yet still, if the sum of six hundred thousand dollars, derived from these taxes, could be dispensed with, doubts might be entertained whether the internal taxes were those which should be first either As to the delay which had been noticed, as reduced or abolished. He held it to be a corhaving taken place in the transaction of busi-rect principle, that taxation should be equal, ness, it was not to be ascribed to any particular mode of procedure; but to the unusual languor of the season; to the absence of several members of great weight; to the augmentation of new members not yet fully acquainted with the forms of business, and to the unusual mass of information presented to the House, which enlarged the field of action, and to the delays of printing arising from the unusual quantity of matter submitted. Internal Taxes. Mr. BAYARD moved that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, for the purpose of enabling him to offer a resolution to the following effect: "Resolved, That the Committee of Ways and Means be instructed to inquire into the expediency of repealing the laws laying duties on stills and distilled spirits, on refined sugar, on sales at auction, on pleasurable carriages, on stamps, and on postage of letters." Mr. BAYARD made this motion for the purpose of placing the important subject contemplated by it in a train for decision. He thought it full time to commence our proceedings upon it; and in his opinion, it was fit that the consideration of the subject, generally, should go before the Committee of Ways and Means. The subject was so important as to strike at the vital principles of our revenue. The repeal of the internal taxes involved a reduction of six hundred thousand dollars in our receipts. The propriety of such a reduction did not constitute a distinct subject for consideration, but depended upon the deductions made on a comprehensive view of our finances, which could only be taken by the Committee of Ways and Means, to whom was committed generally whatever regarded revenue. If the minds of gentlemen, said Mr. B., were made up to abolish all the internal taxes, it must be to them perfectly immaterial to what committee a reference was made. He knew the flattering prospects held out by the President, and he hoped they would all be verified. But his own mind was not made up, nor did he know that the minds of other gentlemen were made up on the propriety of dispensing with these taxes. He was led to this inference by observing no official notice to such effect in the communications made by the Secretary of the Treasury. On the contrary, the Secretary had so made his calculations, predicated as they were upon the continuance of these taxes, that his calculations would be greatly deranged by dispensing with them. Mr. B. knew not that we were prepared to leap this precipice. If the and that no one class of citizens should be burdened to the exemption of all other classes. From a slight consideration of the subject, he had found no other way of enabling our brethren to the westward to participate in the public burdens than by affording them an opportunity of paying their portion of internal revenue. It might appear, on investigation, that more substantial relief would be afforded to the various descriptions of our citizens, by continuing the internal taxes, and reducing those on imports; and if it should be thought proper to diminish the burden imposed on our western citizens, he would ask whether that effect would not be more substantially accomplished by reducing the tax upon salt? It would be recollected that great opposition had been made to the imposition of this tax, which had been denominated oppressive, as it fell upon an article of necessity. Attention ought, also, to be paid to the liability of several articles to be smuggled, the only mode of preventing which was well known to be a reduction of the duties. Mr. B. stated these circumstances, not as evidences of having matured his own ideas; but to show the necessity of referring the subject to a committee, whose special duty it was to take a general view of the resources and expenses of the nation, and who, therefore, in the present stage of the session, were alone in a situation to make the requisite inquiry. Mr. EUSTIS said that the reasons offered by the gentleman from Delaware were with him conclusive that this was not the proper time for considering the subject. Until we know the reductions in the expenditures of the Government that are to be made, it is impossible that we can say how far it will be expedient to reduce or abolish our taxes. We had not determined to what extent the Army or the Navy should be reduced, nor had we come to any ultimate decision on any reduction whatever. For these reasons he must oppose a decision at this time upon the subject, whether that decision was in this or any other shape. Mr. BACON Concurred with Mr. EUSTIS in considering any decision as at present premature. Mr. RUTLEDGE viewed the subject as of great importance. He could not figure to his imagination one likely to occur this session of equal importance. The President contemplated a repeal of all the internal revenues, and the imposition of all taxes upon imported articles. The Secretary of the Treasury appears, by implication, to be of a different opinion, and contemplates a continuance of these duties. What is the object of the gentleman from Delaware? H. OF R.] Internal Taxes. Why, delay; time for consideration, by reference of the subject to a committee most competent to inquire. As to the public burdens, every member on the floor had a common feeling. We do not wish to lay unnecessary taxes. But when taxes are laid, when they are uncomplained of, it was indeed deeply interesting without consideration to decide on their abolition. Mr. R. said, for himself, he should be embarrassed by being forced into an immediate decision. We want information before we are called upon to decide. The motion seeks that information. It sends the business to the Committee of Ways and Means, to whom it belongs of right. It is their duty to consider it, for whatever relates to revenue must go to them. Gentlemen cannot say that they are surprised. By the resolution, they are not called upon to decide upon the subject; they are only called upon to place it in a train for decision. Mr. MACON hoped the business would be taken up, and the sooner it was done, the better. It was certainly of great importance, and the earlier the House proceeded to consider it, the sooner would they be prepared for deciding upon it. If the vote of reference was final, the arguments of the gentleman from Massachusetts would apply. But this was not the case. It had been said that the President had declared his opinion that we can dispense with these taxes. The statement was not correct. His opinion was contingent. He had said, we may dispense with these taxes in case we proportionably reduce the expenses. As to the remarks made respecting the different opinions of the President and Secretary of the Treasury, they likewise were erroneous. Distinct views were taken by each. The President, contemplating a reduction in the expenses, intimates the expediency of repealing the internal taxes; whereas the Secretary of the Treasury, taking things as they are, states the effects of their continuance. From these circumstances, no diversity of opinion could be inferred. Mr. M. concluded by expressing a hope that the expenses of the Government would be reduced, that the internal taxes would be taken off, and that immediate measures would be pursued for preparing the House for a final decision. Mr. EUSTIS was alike hostile to the present motion and to that which had been made by the gentleman from Kentucky, who had yesterday introduced the subject. He had heard the motion with a sensation of uncommon surprise; for he was of opinion that the public attention should not be attracted, or the public sensation excited, till we should be able to determine the course proper to be pursued. He felt himself unprepared to decide, and believed other gentlemen were equally unprepared. He hoped that he cherished a suitable respect for the President of the United States, though he did not know that he would go so far as the gentleman from Delaware, and disband a whole army at his word. | [DECEMBER, 1801. The wisest course was to wait until information was obtained. This would in fact be gaining time. If the Committee of Ways and Means were to consider the subject, it must be under the present state of things. They could not take for granted what might or might not be done by Congress; and before Congress could decide, they must have information which they do not yet possess. He who, under present circumstances, attempted to say to what length our retrenchments would go, and what taxes we could spare, might indeed be called a prophet. We ought not, said Mr. E., to stir the public sensibility improperly or prematurely. By exciting that sensibility before we had determined how to act in future, impressions may be raised which we shall not be able to satisfy. Mr. SMILIE Concurred in opinion with Mr. E and moved, as the best mode of disposing of the subject, that the committee rise. Mr. GRISWOLD declared himself against delay. He knew not why the House were not prepared to decide immediately. The President had introduced the subject, and if any sensibility had been excited, it must be ascribed to him, and not to us. Nor did he think that any ill effects would flow from attracting the public attention. The President did not know, when he addressed us, that we would be for a reduction of the expenses; yet, thinking as he did, it was highly proper in him to give his opinion to the House. So proposed to us, it would exhibit a want of respect to that Magistrate not to take it up immediately. Not to act upon it promptly would be subversive of the national tranquillity after the attention of the public had been directed to it. Mr. SMILIE had thought the gentleman from Connecticut was too well acquainted with the proceedings of that House to say that the Committee of Ways and Means were prepared to act upon this subject. Did they know how far we would reduce the Army, the Navy, or the Judiciary? Mr. VARNUM hoped the committee would rise. Any disposition of the subject was at present premature. As to the calculations of the Secretary alluded to, they were made from the existing revenue, and all his deductions were made therefrom. The President had taken another view of the subject. Contemplating the probability of a reduction in our expenses, he had stated that, in such event, we could dispense with the internal taxes. But whether the contemplated reduction could be made, the House were not prepared to say. Of one thing he was sure, that not a single necessary tax would be abandoned. Mr. DANA said, that more than three weeks have elapsed since the President's communication has been laid before us, and, during that time, a sense of decorum has not induced us to take up one of the most important parts of it. He certainly agreed with gentlemen that we ought to take up the subject and decide for our JANUARY, 1802.] Judiciary System. [H. of R. selves. If we concur with the President, we | rectness of the opinion of the Secretary on this shall repeal the laws; if we do not concur, we point must decide the House as to the propriety may, it is true, risk our popularity by opposing of giving up these taxes. He was one who, so favorite a measure with the people. But though he did not think a state of peace would placed as we shall be between popularity on the materially affect the revenue, had not decided one hand, and duty on the other, as honest men whether a reduction of the public impositions in we should do our duty. But certainly it is our this or that species of revenue should be made. duty now to examine the subject. Grant that He noticed these things, to prevent an impression the reduction in our expenses may extend to a being made on the public mind that the House million, though scarcely half that sum could be were for precipitating a decision. As to the hoped for; still the question remains what public sensation, he felt no alarm. He knew taxes shall be diminished. He could not, for that our measures must depend upon the rehis part, feel all that horror of public sensibility ductions we shall make. that had been portrayed by the gentleman from Massachusetts. What have we to fear, suppose we interfere with that sensibility? If we do so in the discharge of our duty, he was perfectly willing it should be excited; nay, it would be useful to the people themselves. Mr. EUSTIS was perfectly ready to meet the public sensibility, whether for or against us. We had already tried it both ways. He was much pleased with the respect professed by gentlemen for the public sensibility, and also for the communications of the President. But there were parts of those communications, which, notwithstanding the impatience of gentlemen, they would not be displeased at laying unacted upon, not merely three weeks, but three months. Mr. BAYARD did not expect an opposition to his motion from the quarter from which it came; for he had a right to expect as much deference to the President from the opposite, as from his own side. For his part he felt no terrors at meeting the whole, or any part of the President's communications. Whatever he recommended that was right, he would vote for, and whatever was wrong, he would oppose. Though his former habits had led him to cherish a respect for the President, of which he did not repent, yet he felt no servility that would lead him to repress an expression of his senti ments. A gentleman from Pennsylvania had talked about reducing the Army, the Navy, and the Judiciary. But there were other expenses which the gentleman might have dwelt on. Why silent on the Legislature? Let us reduce the length of our sessions. It did not appear consistent in that gentleman to strike at the Judiciary, and other departments, and leave untouched whatever affected himself. Mr. R., for these reasons, was against any decision now; and had the gentleman from Kentucky pressed his motion yesterday, he was prepared to move a postponement of it. In the mean time, there were other important topics involved in the Message that might be referred and acted upon. Mr. DANA presumed that the honorable gentleman from Massachusetts had done him the honor of alluding to him in his remarks. He was not very solicitous that the subject should be inquired into, but since it was brought up, he must say that nothing short of the talents of the honorable gentleman could furnish a semblance of reason for not going immediately into the inquiry. That gentleman errs egregiously, if he imagines that I can dread an investigation of any point involved in the President's Message. He would add, that whatever his particular opinion might be of the person to whom had been confided the Government of the nation, it became him only to see in him the First Magistrate of the country, and to treat him with correspondent respect, and to see in what he did, not the man, but the measure. The question was then taken on the committee rising, and lost-yeas 29, nays 48. The reference to the Committee of Ways and MONDAY, January 4, 1802. WILLIAM BARRY GROVE, from North Carolina, appeared, produced his credentials, and took his seat in the House. Ordered, That Mr. MILLEDGE be appointed to the Committee of Ways and Means, in the room of Mr. DICKSON, who is sick and unable to attend. Judiciary System. Mr. RANDOLPH did not desire to occupy much of the time of the committee, as he thought it immaterial whether the committee rise or not. But he wished, for the information, and perhaps Mr. RANDOLPH moved that the House should for the satisfaction, of the gentleman from Mas- go into a Committee of the Whole on the state sachusetts, to state that, among other members, of the Union, with the view of submitting three he was one who had not decided whether Gov-resolutions to the committee, viz: ernment could dispense with the internal taxes. He hoped, and was inclined to believe, that they might be dispensed with. The Secretary of the Treasury had expressly stated that part of his report was speculative, viz: that part. which inferred the effects of peace. The cor "Resolved, That it is expedient to inquire whether any, and what, alterations should be made in the Judicial Establishment of the United States. "Resolved, That provision ought to be made for the impartial selection of juries. "Resolved, That it is expedient to inquire whether H. OF R.] Judiciary System. [JANUARY, 1802. were selected, but because they had not long since existed, and because in similar circumstances they might again exist. He was glad the gentleman from Delaware had no reason to complain of their present abuse. But this was no security against the future. any, and what, reductions can be made in the civil | the exercise of the powers under which jurors expenses of the Government of the United States." The House accordingly went into committee. Mr. BAYARD presumed an agreement to these resolutions would, in their present shape, meet with no opposition. It was impossible to determine what shape they would ultimately assume. The Judiciary system was doubtless susceptible of amendment, and if any proper amendments should be proposed, he would concur in their adoption. With respect to the second resolution, though he did not know that there was any necessity for altering the mode at present practised of selecting juries, not having heard of any complaints under it, yet, as the resolution only led to an inquiry into the subject, he would not object. With regard to the last resolution, it was one in which we must all concur. The object, if attainable, would be extremely grateful to all of us. The three resolutions were agreed to without a division. The committee then rose, and reported them to the House. On the report being taken up, Mr. RANDOLPH moved that the consideration of the two first resolutions be postponed till the third Monday of January. Mr. BAYARD hoped the motion for postponement would not prevail. The propositions were abstract ones, leading to inquiry, and the sooner they were acted upon, the better. The mode pursued by the gentleman from Virginia, if his simple object was to give notice, was the least happy that he could have devised, for it gave to gentlemen no opportunity to prepare themselves, as they were totally unacquainted, in the present stage of the business, as to what would be the alterations proposed. If a committee were now appointed, they would have time to deliberate on a subject of the utmost importance one so complicated as to require great attention. When their report was made, he would be one of those who would ask from the candor of the House time to consider it. Mr. BAYARD said, that he had spoken as he had done, not for the purpose of expressing any opinion that any abuse respecting juries had been recently removed under the present state of things; but to state that he had never heard of any complaints on this subject in the part of the Union from which he came; and he had particularly alluded to the mode of designating jurors in his State, which was by ballot. But if there were complaints in other parts of the Union, he would co-operate in any means that could be devised for removing them. Mr. SMILIE said, that since the gentleman from Delaware had introduced the subject, and had declared that no complaints existed, he would say that complaints had existed, that just grounds for them existed, and that they had been expressed in the loudest tone. And he would appeal to the gentleman from Delaware whether any man could be safe who was at the mercy of a marshal, who was the mere creature of the President. Mr. BAYARD.-While man continues as be is, there will be complaints on this subject. We are divided into parties. The people, as well as the President, must belong to one side or the other; and whether we have sheriffs chosen by the people, or marshals appointed by the Presi dent, the evil will still exist. He had no objec tion, if it were the wish of gentlemen, that the marshals should be appointed by the people: though we know that the people are as apt, nay more apt, to be infected with violent political feelings, than an Executive officer. Mr. RANDOLPH said, that without desiring to exhaust the time of the House on a point where there was no difference of opinion, he could not permit the observation of the gentleman from will-Delaware to pass unnoticed; that an officer, holding a lucrative office, appointed by the President, and dependent upon his will, is as independent as a sheriff, elected in some States annually by the people, and in other States appointed in a manner calculated to ensure his independence. He would instance the State of Virginia, in which the sheriffs were nominated by the justices of the county courts, who, it was understood, were to hold the office of sheriff in rotation. Will the gentleman say that these men, who are independent of the pleasure of any man, are liable to be made the same tools, with officers who hold their appointments at the absolute will of one man? Mr. RANDOLPH said, he was at all times ing to accommodate gentlemen of every political description on proper occasions. Apprehending that his resolutions, if taken up in the House, would give rise to discussion, he had moved for their postponement, from a wish not to interfere with the desire of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, and other gentlemen, to act on the apportionment bill. As his motion for postponement appeared likely to be itself productive of discussion, by which the time of the House would be exhausted, and the means he used defeat the end he had in view, he would withdraw his motion. The House then agreed to the resolutions without a division. Mr. RANDOLPH moved the reference of the two first resolutions to the same committee. He said, in reply to the gentleman from Delaware, that he made the motion respecting juries not because any complaint did at present exist of Mr. R. would further say, that the remark of the gentleman from Delaware, that the existence of no complaints had ever come to his ears, had excited his extreme astonishment. In North Carolina, he believed, no legal jury had been selected since the establishment of the Federal Government. In that State, in the State courts, all juries are first selected in the inferior courts, and then sent to the superior courts. He would ask, how, under these circumstances, a jury could be struck in a federal court in that State agreeably to law? In Virginia and Pennsylvania, the independence of sheriffs is secured; therefore, no restrictions are imposed upon them in selecting juries; whereas, in the federal courts the marshal is the abject creature of the Executive-and yet we are told the security is the same! Mr. R. did not wish to consume the time of the House; but when views are taken by gentlemen calculated, either as to fact or sentiment, to lead the public mind astray, if other gentlemen did not, he would invariably notice them. Mr. BAYARD desired to explain. He had not meant to contend that sheriff's chosen for three years by the people were as dependent as similar officers appointed by the President. He had alluded to the effects which flowed from a marked division of parties. We were in all events subject to that evil. It was a truth that men deeply infected with party were more apt to be chosen by the people than by an Executive magistrate; because the people felt more strongly a degree of political fanaticism. After some further debate, it was determined to refer the two first resolutions to a committee of seven, and the last to a committee of five members. Ordered, That Mr. NICHOLSON, Mr. JOHN TALIAFERRO, Jr., Mr. GODDARD, Mr. RUTLEDGE, Mr. ISRAEL SMITH, Mr. HENDERSON, and Mr. BAILEY, be appointed a committee, pursuant to the first and second resolutions. Ordered, That Mr. BACON, Mr. GROVE, Mr. ELMENDORPH, Mr. HEMPHILL, and Mr. ABRAM TRIGG, be appointed a committee, pursuant to the third resolution. TUESDAY, January 5. On the question being taken for striking out thirty-three, it was lost-yeas 42, nays 48. Mr. DENNIS moved to strike out eight, the number of Representatives allotted to Maryland, and insert nine; which amendment had been rendered necessary by the supplementary return received from Maryland. On this motion a very desultory debate took place, which was twice interrupted by motions for the committee to rise, which were both lost. Much personal recrimination, chiefly on the charge of delay on the one side, and precipitation on the other, was exchanged. The amendment was at last agreed to-yeas 57. The committee then rose and reported the bill as amended. The House immediately took up the report of the committee, agreed to the amendments, and ordered the bill to be engrossed for a third reading to-morrow. THURSDAY, January 7. [H. OF R. The House went into Committee of the Whole on the standing rules of the House. Mr. LEIB moved the addition of the following rule: nographers on the floor, as shall not interfere with "The Speaker shall assign such places to the stethe convenience of the House." Mr. LEIB prefaced his motion, by observing sion appeared to be made for the admission of that, in the standing rules proposed, no provistenographers. They had heretofore been subhis respect for the present Speaker, he was of ject to the will of the Speaker. However great opinion, that they should not depend for their accommodation upon the will of any man; and he thought it became the House, on this occasion, to establish a precedent which would place those who took the debates above the caprice of any individual. Mr. HUGER moved to amend the motion so as to read as follows; "Stenographers shall be admitted, and the Speaker shall assign to them such places on the floor as shall not interfere with the convenience of the House." Mr. LEIB agreed to this modification. The motion was opposed by Mr. GRISWOLD, Mr. RUTLEDGE, Mr. VARNUM, Mr. HEMPHILL, Mr. T. MORRIS, Mr. EUSTIS, Mr. DANA, Mr. ELMER, and Mr. GODDARD; and supported by Mr. LEIB, Mr. S. SMITH, Mr. NICHOLSON, Mr. CLAIBORNE, Mr. SMILIE, Mr. HOLLAND, and Mr. SPRIGG. Mr. HUGER opposed the original motion of Mr. LEIB, but supported the motion, as amended by himself. The opponents of the motion declared, that it did not relate to substance, but merely to form; that it was allowed on all hands, that the debates should be taken, and that stenographers should, consequently, be admitted. But the single question was, how, and under what authority, they should be admitted. They remarked, that they had heretofore been admitted by the Speaker, under whose direction they had remained; that the Speaker was the only proper authority under whose direction they ought still to remain; that, as the preservation of order and decorum rested with him, the stenographers, as well as other persons, should be permitted by him to enter the House, and be by him excluded, whenever, in his opinion, the order and a respect for the House required it. That, in case stenographers deported themselves in a disrespectful manner, or grossly misrepresented the ideas of members, the Speaker was the only person who could effectually cure the evil; that there had been, and might again be, instances of such misconduct; that, in one case, a stenographer had entered the House in a state of intoxication; another case, a speech of a gentleman from South Carolina, had been perversely misrepresented, and the stenographer |